A conventional vehicle includes various systems that allow the user, i.e., the driver or passenger, a means of interfacing with the vehicle, specifically providing a means for monitoring vehicle conditions and controlling various vehicle functions. Depending upon the complexity of the systems to be monitored and/or controlled, such a user interface may utilize visual, tactile and/or audible feedback, and may be comprised of multiple interfaces, each interface grouping together those controls necessary to monitor and/or operate a specific vehicle subsystem (e.g., HVAC, entertainment, navigation, etc.).
The past few decades have seen a dramatic shift in the design and composition of a typical vehicle interface, this shift being driven in part due to the ever-increasing complexity of vehicle subsystems and in part by the migration of computer-oriented interfaces, such as touch-screens, to the vehicle. As a result of this shift, the user is given much more control over their vehicle and its subsystems. Unfortunately this added control often comes at the cost of interface simplicity which, in turn, may lead to the development of unsafe driving habits due to increased driver distraction during operation of the interface. Additionally, the loss of interface simplicity, or the use of an interface that is poorly designed or counter-intuitive, may lead to user frustration and dissatisfaction.
To insure driver and passenger safety, vehicle control systems are preferably designed to be intuitive. Additionally, common vehicle interfaces that control a safety-related vehicle subsystem (e.g., lights, windshield wipers, etc.) are typically designed to insure driver familiarity, for example by locating a particular control system in the same general location regardless of manufacturer. For instance, most cars use either a rotating switch or a stalk-mounted switch, mounted to the left side of the steering wheel, to operate the headlights and parking lights. Similarly, most cars use a stalk-mounted switch to the right of the steering wheel to operate the windshield wipers. Although less critical, vehicle system monitors such as the speedometer or tachometer may also be mounted in similar locations by multiple manufacturers, thereby providing the driver with a familiar setting. Unlike the primary control systems, however, the user interfaces for the auxiliary vehicle systems are often the subject of substantial design innovation as different car manufacturers try to achieve an interface that is novel, intuitive and preferably relatively simple to operate. Often times a manufacturer will try to distinguish their vehicles from those of other manufacturers partially based on such an interface. Conversely, a poorly designed interface may be used by the competition to ridicule and devalue a particular vehicle.
While conventional vehicles provide a variety of devices and techniques for the driver and/or passenger to control and monitor the vehicle's various subsystems and functions, typically the end user is given no ability to modify or customize the interface to meet their particular needs and usage patterns. Additionally, other than for changing the interface appearance in response to varying light conditions, a typical vehicle user interface does not adapt to changing conditions. As a result, an interface that may work extremely well under one set of conditions, e.g., parked in the day, may work quite poorly under a different set of conditions, e.g., driving at a high speed along a windy road at night. Accordingly, what is needed is a vehicle user interface that automatically changes with changing conditions, thus improving subsystem control during non-optimal driving conditions. The present invention provides such a user interface.